view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
Okay, explain exactly how Biden would have been able to ban assault weapons, cut insulin costs and expand student loan forgiveness without congress. And without SCOTUS blocking it. I'd honestly like to know.
I'm going to say a thing that would be considered entirely reasonable if we were talking about any other profession, but since we are talking about the powerful, will be disregarded:
That is not my job. That is the president's job. I should not be expected to come up with a strategy to solve their problems. When they tell me they are going to do something, and then fail to do so, they did a bad job.
I used to think like you do. I used to think I was savvier than all the naive people who wanted things from their politicians, and criticized the politicians when they didn't deliver, because how could they have? But over time I've realized that I was being duped. That I should stop arguing that better things aren't possible, because when people believe that, it comes true.
A criticism I'll head off: I understand I can't vote for them and forget it. I'm not advocating for reduced civil engagement; it's our job to protest and agitate.
Please provide evidence that I think I am "savvier than all the naive people who wanted things from their politicians and criticized politicians when they didn't deliver."
Unless that was a lie. Was it a lie that I think the way you used to think?
Sure, in response to this statement that is a criticism that Biden did not deliver:
You said:
I don't think it's unfair to say you think it is naive to believe that the "president can act unilaterally", and the natural converse of naivety is being savvy.
Anyway, I fail to see the point of arguing with someone who thinks I am a liar, so I will bow out of this conversation. Have a nice day. Believe it or not, I do sincerely wish you well.
Then why promise it
Because that's how politics has worked for centuries. Is this your first day on planet Earth?
And why should anyone believe his empty worthless promises he has no intention of doing anything about this time?
We all know that Democrats don't want to do shit about Roe. We know they'll find just enough no votes, or find some procedural bullshit excuse, and of course they will never get rid of the filibuster.
I always wonder what proposal you people actually suggest that isn't Joe Biden walking into the Senate with a gun and pointing it at Manchin.
President doesn’t need to point a gun at someone, just a TV camera and the willingness to actually fight for something.
I hadn't thought of that but it might actually work.
Then explain to us morons what "prioritizing" abortion rights actually means. Because right now you're saying there's nothing he can do.
If he knows he can't pass it and promises it anyway, why should we believe any of his promises? They're not worth the barely tepid air he expended to make them.
And Trump didn't repeal Obamacare or make Mexico pay for a wall. Welcome to politics; politicians tend to speak more in wish-lists than easily actionable items.
Yes, Trump is full of shit. I'm not a Trump supporter. "Trump did it" is a shitty justification. Particularly from a party that refused to fire the parliamentarian in order to pass a minimum wage hike they don't want to pass on the grounds that it's what Republicans would do.
And if they did speak in easily actionable items OP would immediately claim he's not going far enough and it's a milquetoast solution.